Welcome to Pathfinder Online Wiki! We hope you will contribute much and well. You will probably want to read the help pages. Again, welcome and have fun! Yoda8myhead (talk) 02:55, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
I think you're going to find that you want to use a template to automatically fill that page. Formatting it with
<br /> instead of hard line breaks will also keep the individual bulleted lines much closer together. Was there a particular reason you didn't want to continue using the template I put together? The formatting could easily be incorporated with the nested data templates Nihimon has been perfecting. — Yoda8myhead (talk) 23:37, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
-- Nope, your template was perfect IMO, in fact I was going to copy the basics of it and modify for other areas. Nihimon just wanted a normal page, with no templates, done to each type of feat, minus expendables, to get an idea purely of structure, for temporary purposes. Once he is done incorporating all the data into the wiki, we are going to go back and start using templates to present it. I know this is a different way of doing things, but I have faith that what he is doing will make things a lot easier, once he's done, on updating any changes, etc. —NytCrawlr (talk) 21:31, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
I see you're starting the framework for a category tree, and wanted to point out a few best practices we learned on the main wiki.
First, try not to place categories within their own subcategories. It just gets confusing. Ever category an article or category belongs to should be a group to which it belongs (I know that's circular logic). For example:
- The Major Armor Keyword, "Masterwork", belongs to the following sets:
- Major Armor Keywords
- Major Keywords
- Armor Keywords
Each of those sets in turn belongs to other sets.
- Major Armor Keywords belongs to the following sets:
- Major Keywords
- Armor Keywords
- Note that it doesn't belong to Keywords, because someone in the Keywords category page can navigate to this set via either of the two paths above.
- Major Keywords belongs to the following set:
- It doesn't belong to the other two because not all Major Keywords are Armor Keywords, nor are they all Major Armor Keywords
- Armor Keywords belongs to the following set:
- Again, because not all Armor Keywords Are Major Armor Keywords, nor are they all Major Keywords.
- Finally, Keywords belongs in a larger root category, which I've named Mechanics.
When placing articles in categories, think whether or not it should be alphabetized in the category list. The article, Keywords, shouldn't really appear buried in the Ks when someone is looking at Category:Keywords—it should stand alone and come before A. But within Category:Mechanics, it can totally be alphabetized under K, because there will also be articles in that category for Feats, Weapons, Armors, Recipes, Escalation Cycles, etc.
To set a different term by which to organize a page or subcategory within a parent category, simply add a pipe and the name you want it sorted under. If you want it sorted before the "A" header, leave a space immediately after the pipe, before the name you want it alphabetized by there.
I also suggest that, instead of category names like Category:Major Keywords - Armor, you place the words in an order that will them stand out from one another in alphabetized lists. "Major Armor Keywords" is easier to read to someone actually perusing the category tree, while "Armor Keywords (Major)" is going to default to better alphabetization. Something to consider.
Let me know if you have any questions, as setting up clear and clean category trees at the beginning of a project is MUCH easier than trying to recategorize hundreds or thousands of articles and categories later on. — Yoda8myhead (talk) 22:29, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
--Thank you for the great advice. It has been awhile and I am quite rusty, as you can tell, so it took me awhile to get the basic flow down again. But yes, I agree with pretty much all of what you have said and have been thinking on it some over the last week. I am also considering nuking Major and Minor Keywords totally and just using Armor Keywords (Major), etc.--NytCrawlr (talk) 17:41, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Hey Nyt; I noticed that we have been tagging pages with the 'Category: Golarion' category at the end. Should we not maybe make that 'Category: Pathfinder Online' ? Dazyk (talk) 16:22, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
-- Yeah, I am uncertain on how to set that base up. Originally it was "The World", but then I changed it to "Golarion" because that is the world, heh. Was thinking we need to stay close to the other side of the Wiki, but they are doing PathfinderWiki, which to me seems too much. I'm fine with just Pathfinder Online, but I have already created a Category for PFO, and was thinking we could just stick to that and clean up some of my earlier attempts with that.
New Format for Feats
NytCrawlr, I've updated the Cantrips page, and the Acid Dart page to show you have to access the new format lists and individual pages. Something needs to be done to format the Feats, but I think you know what needs to be done. Nihimon (talk) 03:50, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
You should be able to apply the Cantrips model to "Physical Attacks", "Orisons". You can do the same with Expendables, but replace all occurrences of "AttackFeats" in the template with "ExpendableFeats". It's going to be a very big job to go through each Feat page and update it, but the updated (based on the example for Acid Dart) is simple. Nihimon (talk) 03:53, 23 September 2014 (UTC)